Revolt of scientology?

A

Anonymous

Guest
So, there is a new Hollywood blockbuster in production, in Berlin. The working title is "Valkyrie", and it is going to star Tom Cruise in the role of Claus Schenk Graf von Stauffenberg.

To those who are not sure what this is about, let me give you the basics. In 1944, Stauffenberg, a high-ranking officer of the Wehrmacht, was part of a conspiracy to kill Hitler. On 20. July, the attempt -a bomb attack- was made, in Hitlers headquarters near the East Prussian town of Rastenburg. The attempt failed, but Stauffenberg returned to Berlin and announced on radio channels that the Fuhrer was dead. Shortly afterwards, he was sentenced to death and executed by nazi authorities.
The 20. July 1944 is something of a mythological date, especially for German patriots, because it serves to prove that not all Germans were nazis, and especially, because not even the entire Wehrmacht was, and there was resistance even in the highest ranks (Erwin Rommel is also associated with this conspiracy). In Germany, the event is also known as the "revolt of conscience". Moreover, the conspiracy and especially Stauffenbergs decision is considered a perfect example of the struggle of morale vs principle (Stauffenberg was a dedicated soldier, and he did not take the fact, that he had sworn an oath to Hitler lightly) and as such, is discussed in German schools.

Now, while it is quite impressive that Tom Cruise did not choose to play an American trying to assassinate Hitler, but for once decided to stick to historical facts, the filming is already very controversial in Germany. The main -only- reason for that is that Cruise is a scientologist, which is a big problem for many Germans. Many do feel that he is not worthy of portraying such a "national hero" (fuck that, but whatever), and he has not been allowed to film on historic locations. The subject is quite discussed in the media here, and while most agree that Cruise is a huge arsehole (I personally don't know a single person who likes him), some feel that discriminating him because he is a scientologist -however active and advertising- is going too far.

Just for further information, there have been a few German films on the matter, the most prominent probably being Der 20. Juli and Stauffenberg.
 
Perun said:
The main -only- reason for that is that Cruise is a scientologist, which is a big problem for many Germans. Many do feel that he is not worthy of portraying such a "national hero" (fuck that, but whatever), and he has not been allowed to film on historic locations. The subject is quite discussed in the media here, and while most agree that Cruise is a huge arsehole (I personally don't know a single person who likes him), some feel that discriminating him because he is a scientologist -however active and advertising- is going too far.

The Germans seem to have a thing for discriminating against people because of their religion. I hope they don't try to come up with a final solution to this problem.

If he were a crazy staunch Catholic like Mel Gibson, would Germans be getting their Lederhosen in a twist? I doubt it.
 
I have been to this bunker. As you know, it's in Poland.

WolfsLairMap.png


It was actually a part of my honeymoon in Poland, haha!
It's a cool site to visit, though I remember the mosquitos and the heat (it was in July)!

400px-Wolfsschanze%2C_Gierloz%2C_Poland_2.jpg


A bit more info about the site:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfsschanze

Could you tell me, Perun, if they also shoot footage around the real bunker area? It's in control of Polish people, so I wonder if this is also a hard time for Cruise, or not? In what way are the Germans troubling him? And what are the arguments exactly?

Thanks in advance, I'm very interested to see this film!

edit: Another thing, did you ever see the documentary about the bombing? I think it was done by Discovery but I'm not sure anymore. They checked if Hitler survived the bomb because the bomb suitcase was standing against a "table-leg". The did an exact remake of the bomb with precize calculations, tested it with and without an exact remake of the table and they found out that Hitler definitely must have died if Hitler was not protected by the table.
 
Forostar said:
I have been to this bunker. As you know, it's in Poland. It was actually a part of my honeymoon in Poland, haha!
It's a cool site to visit, though I remember the mosquitos and the heat (it was in July)!

Believe it or not, but my grandmother was from Rastenburg.

Could you tell me, Perun, if they also shoot footage around the real bunker area? It's in control of Polish people, so I wonder if this is also a hard time for Cruise, or not? In what way are the Germans troubling him? And what are the arguments exactly?

I don't know. Right now, the shooting is in Berlin, and I kind of doubt they're going to film the bombing on location ;)
The Germans aren't exactly troubling him, except denying permission for on location shooting in several buildings in Berlin. But there is a huge discussion about all that, because of his active religion and a recent offensive of Scientologists in the country.

edit: Another thing, did you ever see the documentary about the bombing? I think it was done by Discovery but I'm not sure anymore. They checked if Hitler survived the bomb because the bomb suitcase was standing against a "table-leg". The did an exact remake of the bomb with precize calculations, tested it with and without an exact remake of the table and they found out that Hitler definitely must have died if Hitler was not protected by the table.

I read and heard a lot about all this kind of research. Basically, the general consensus still is that the attempt would never have failed, despite any tables, if the meeting would have taken place in the real bunker as originally planned.
 
Perun said:
Thanks for this valuable and serious answer.  :yawn:

I was being serious, you sarcastic butt muncher :p
I seriously think that if Cruise was Catholic and nuts (like Mel Gibson), nobody would have a problem with it. Germans, of all people, should know of the dangers of disliking someone just because of their religion.

I don't agree with Cruise on religion, but he has a right to practice any fiath he wants (or even none at all).
 
Well, Perun.  It seems to me that the Duke was exactly right.  I don't agree with Tom Cruise's opinions or his religion, but it is his right to choose them.  I don't agree with the Church of Scientology and I think someone really needs to examine the inner workings of it.  But one man shouldn't be persecuted for his beliefs, even though he is a douche about it.

Being a Scientologist doesn't make one a bad actor.  It does make one an idiot, but acting is a profession that is less about IQ and more about looks.  Tom Cruise isn't a bad actor, either.  I am surprised that it's not an Americanized movie, like you already said, which is nice (consider how they completely removed the Prussians from Japanese history in The Last Samurai).  I would like to think the Germans would give him a chance to try and make a half-ways decent movie...but no.
 
IronDuke said:
I was being serious, you sarcastic butt muncher :p
(...) Germans, of all people, should know of the dangers of disliking someone just because of their religion.

I really hope you are not serious with that, because if you are, you are demonstrating extremely poor knowledge of Germany and its history. For the sake of clarification, the nazis did not consider the Jews a religious community, but a race.

For the record, I personally don't give a rat's arse about Tom Cruise or his religion, but the way he is going about it (which is, actively promoting it) is clearly wrong.
 
Interesting that your grandmother was from Rastenburg. Perhaps she had even seen Hitler for real.

Perun said:
I read and heard a lot about all this kind of research. Basically, the general consensus still is that the attempt would never have failed, despite any tables, if the meeting would have taken place in the real bunker as originally planned.

It would not have failed in this very bunker if the suitcase stood on the other side of the table leg.

I think that the Scientology Church is a pseudoreligion. Other pseudoreligions: e.g. Nazism, Marxist-Communism.
 
Forostar said:
Interesting that your grandmother was from Rastenburg. Perhaps she had even seen Hitler for real.

I don't know. At some point, she moved to Berlin, but I know very little about that. Alas, I can't ask her anymore...

I think that the Scientology Church is a pseudoreligion. Other pseudoreligions: e.g. Nazism, Marxist-Communism.

Ditto on that.
 
Forostar said:
Other pseudoreligions: e.g. Nazism, Marxist-Communism.

Those are not even pseudo-religions. They are ideologies... big difference. It is no secret I fashion myself a marxist/socialist/communist, but I don't worship Marx, Lenin or Stalin, much less Mao or Castro.

As for Cruise being "wrong" for actively promoting scientology, WTF? What is wrong about that? Jahova Witnesses and Mormons actively "promote" their religion by going around knocking on people's doors, Catholics, Orthodox, Lutherans and Calvinists had missionaries all over the world and still do. What is "wrong" with doing the same with Scientology? Don't even THINK of answering, "promoting ANY religion is wrong" because that's a fucking pussy bullshit answer, people can do whatever the fuck they want. Is it annoying that they do it? Yes. Wrong? Not in the least.
 
Alright, I admit that I've copied the following from Wikipedia, but this article says pretty much what I meant:

------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudo_Religion

Pseudoreligion (or pseudotheology) is a generally pejorative term applied to a non-mainstream belief system or philosophy which is functionally similar to religious practices, typically having a founder, principal text, liturgy and faith-based beliefs.

Belief systems such as Theosophy, corporate Kabbalism and the Nation of Islam have all been referred to as pseudoreligions, as have political ideologies such as Nazism, Marxist-Communism, as well as secular humanism and various New Age religions. While the more serious-minded participants in these groups may prefer to consider themselves part of a proper religion, or not part of a religion at all, the mainstream ascribes to them fringe status.

Such groups as the Raëlian Church, Heaven's Gate, or Scientology, when seen as dangerous, exploitive, secretive, or closed, have been classified as pseudoreligious cults. ... ...

-----------

Since I see Scientology as dangerous and exploitive, I classify it as a pseudoreligious.

The danger lies in their believe that their goal is to recycle the earth. These ideas are cold, systematic and in a way fascistic.
 
Onhell said:
As for Cruise being "wrong" for actively promoting scientology, WTF? What is wrong about that? Jahova Witnesses and Mormons actively "promote" their religion by going around knocking on people's doors, Catholics, Orthodox, Lutherans and Calvinists had missionaries all over the world and still do. What is "wrong" with doing the same with Scientology? Don't even THINK of answering, "promoting ANY religion is wrong" because that's a fucking pussy bullshit answer, people can do whatever the fuck they want. Is it annoying that they do it? Yes. Wrong? Not in the least.

What is wrong with it is the method. The method Scientology promotes itself in the first place. They stop you on the street asking you to do a personality test, and if you're not clever enough to have noticed their L. Ron Hubbart posters in the background (or have no clue what they are about), you do it, and whatever you answer, they will interpret it in a way that tells you there's something seriously wrong with you. They invite you to some sort of seminar, where they tell you how they can help you solve your problems for a 'little' fee, no mention of any religious sect. And once you're in that, you can't get out.
That, my friend, has NOTHING to do with religion.
 
Scientology is a very, very scary religion.  They are less of a religion and more of a...well.  A cult, for lack of a better term.  It is financially driven by the systematic stripping of the finances of the lower members, which are then funnelled up the pyramid.  It's a massive, brilliantly-orchestrated pyramid scheme.  I don't know how they convince people.  Maybe they dope them up on drugs or something...but it's crazed.  I can't believe it.  It's not a religion.
 
LooseCannon said:
It's not a religion.

I hate to disagree with you, buddy, but it IS a religion. In Sociological terms, it fits all the criteria. It has genuine followers who self-identify as a community based around their shared belief in the supernatural. It may seem like a stupid one to us, but we haven't been exposed to the same things as the followers have.
Believing in the religion created by L. Ron Hubbard in the 1960's is no less crazy than:
- believing in that Mohammad rode on a flying horse from Medina to Jerusalem one night
- that Jesus had magic powers that allowed him to make bread, fish, and wine out of thin air. (or come back to life after being executed in a particularly nasty manner...ZOMBIE JESUS!) Because Jesus could do that, Europeans for centuries gave lots of their money to a glorified banker in Rome. (WTF?)
- or that you can end all suffering by merely ending desire, and thus ceasing to exist (nirvana)
- or that a stick can turn into a snake and scare the crap out of an Egyptian king

In short, pretty much any religion's core beliefs are a bit whacky from the perspective of scientific analysis, and they all involve ways of some people controlling the thoughts and actions of many other people. It's how they work. Scientology simply is the latest of them, and because it's so new that we can trace its exact origins it seems even loonier to us than most.
However, that doesn't diminish the power and significance it has for its followers.
 
Forostar said:
I think that the Scientology Church is a pseudoreligion. Other pseudoreligions: e.g. Nazism, Marxist-Communism.

I can't believe that you said such a thing man.... WTF ?

Forostar said:
Alright, I admit that I've copied the following from Wikipedia, but this article says pretty much what I meant:

------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudo_Religion

Pseudoreligion (or pseudotheology) is a generally pejorative term applied to a non-mainstream belief system or philosophy which is functionally similar to religious practices, typically having a founder, principal text, liturgy and faith-based beliefs.

this is all bullshit Forostar, if we consider things like this, then ALL religions are started like pseudo-religions...
...and I don't see in your wikipedia term the similarities with Marxism*


*
or philosophy which is functionally similar to religious practices

and finally : where the hell did you find the term Marxist-Communism ? such a term is 100% propaganda and did never existed,
is similar to "terms" like anarcho-communism, or I don't know what, be carrefull with your wikipedia
references, wikipedia is a first step for a further research and -as it seems- nothing more
 
no5, you fail.

Marxist-Communism is a term used to refer to straight-from-the-Manifesto Communism, in comparison to Leninism or Stalinism (sometimes refered to as Lenin-Communism & Stalin-Communism).  Mao-Communism is another term.  Marxist-Communism is an ideology because it's utopian, it's impossible.

Secondly, your objection to Forostar's use of the term psuedoreligion is based, apparently, on ignorance.  It appears you don't seem to get what the term "belief system" means.  It means something that is, if not new, then politicised.  Was Christianity a psuedo-religion when it began?  Of course it was.  But then it became mainstream.  One can argue that it is still politicised.  Just because all religions go through a stage of psuedoreligion doesn't make the term incorrect.

Finally, I wholeheartedly agree that you can assign fanatical political movements into a psuedoreligious role, ESPECIALLY Communism, which embraces the idea of atheism combined with patriotism to enforce a belief in the commune instead of the divine.  That sure sounds religious to me, even if not in a typical sense.  The same way in which Nazism pushed loyalty beyond death to the Führer.  Oh, wait.  That's semi religious, new, and political...I need a term for that.  What, psuedoreligion?  Good term.

Let me repeat: fail.
 
What makes scientology an idiotic cult is not its whacked-out beliefs - which, as the Duke correctly pointed out, are no more nonsensical than those of any other religion. The really dumb and cult-like part is that they demand money - THOUSANDS of dollars - from their members, and tell them that if they don't pay up then they're doomed.

I'm too lazy to look it up right now, but there's a famous quote from Hubbard, from about 1 year before he started scientology, where he said something like "The best way to make money is to start a religion". It was never about any real belief; it's always been about money for the leadership.

That's why Germany rightly regards it as a dangerous cult, not to be promoted. The Xenu crap is irrelevant. They're trying to cheat honest people out of all their money.
 
SinisterMinisterX said:
What makes scientology an idiotic cult is not its whacked-out beliefs - which, as the Duke correctly pointed out, are no more nonsensical than those of any other religion. The really dumb and cult-like part is that they demand money - THOUSANDS of dollars - from their members, and tell them that if they don't pay up then they're doomed.

I'm too lazy to look it up right now, but there's a famous quote from Hubbard, from about 1 year before he started scientology, where he said something like "The best way to make money is to start a religion". It was never about any real belief; it's always been about money for the leadership.

That's why Germany rightly regards it as a dangerous cult, not to be promoted. The Xenu crap is irrelevant. They're trying to cheat honest people out of all their money.

"If you want to make a little money, write a book. If you want to make a lot of money, create a religion." - L. Ron Hubbard, 1950


I agree with you, SMX, that it's a dirty, dangerous cultish faith. However, how is the way they demand money different from how Christian churches guilt their congregations into giving each Sunday? They use all sorts of pressure, and some of the crazier Protestant denominations actually say that those who give most are somehow holier. The Catholics are a bit more sophisticated, but just as bad.

Scientology is just a lot more blatant about it, and I'd bet a bit more successful.

Like I said before, all religions are just ways for a small group of people to control the actions of others & get a share of their wealth without really working.
 
Back
Top